They don't take corporate PAC money and advocate for Progressive policies. Better and more exciting than the third way.

Without Justice Democrats I'd probably give up on politics.

Without them I'd give up on politics. Have fun with moderates and far right extremists. Neither are for me.

It didn't take long after Trump's racist tweets to go back to bashing liberals.

Thanks for saying this.

When it comes to fighting back against tRump and conservative nonsense, they absolutely are on our side. When it comes to specific issues and politicians, then you'll have some differences of opinion. Unless you've got a questionnaire to determine "purity", this us vs them nonsense inside the Democratic party can be confusing. Please enlighten the masses on the correct definition of a "good Democrat" so our righteous indignation can be pointed in the right direction.

In the meantime, I'll continue to assume that the Democratic party is made of many people willing to passionately debate the issues with the underlying principle that we want what is best for all individuals and the country and diffences of opinion are welcome. In other words, we aren't at all like republicans.

never go after the Cons

As I understand it, they want progressives to win primaries and support candidates running on a progressive platform against incumbent corporate democrats. Since we are in primary season, that's a lot of the focus. But at the end of the day they are highly critical of republicans and their fake conservatism.

I see them on MSNBC always criticizing the Dems. I suspect the reason is that they want a revolution and they think they have the best chance at that by destroying the Dem caucus as it is and taking it over.

But if you listened to the TYT network you would hear more. They are unequivocal with their criticism of conservatives. I don't always agree with their criticism of Democrats but they are, to their credit, transparent about their bias and desire for a strong progressive caucus. You won't find those kind of disclosures on most media outlets who pretend a bias doesn't exist on their part (but, surprise, typically show a conservative bend on the news).

I don't like their attitude towards Nancy or other Dems in the first place nor do I appreciate the concept of trying to bring about a revolution to suit their own purposes and aims, damn the consequences.

But to each our own opinion.

In the 2018 elections, 26 of the 79 candidates endorsed by Justice Democrats won their respective primary elections. Seven of these candidates won in the general election: Raúl Grijalva, Ro Khanna, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Pramila Jayapal. Districts won ranged from D+13 to D+34 on the Cook PVI, indicative of a majority Democratic voting population. No swing districts were won.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Democrats

And ignoring historical precedent (which doesn't perceive 34% as ineffective, regardless of the gossip we may otherwise pretend at lunch), on what specific data is that objective measure predicated upon?

Only 7 of the 79 (8%) actually WON the election, and that was because they were in Safe D districts.

....one could conclude that they really were only 3 for 79.

Correct?

That makes it a 3.79% success rate or an 0.0379 success rate. If you going to express as a percentage, you are already moving the decimal point two places to the right.

For example, 23 out of 100 is either 23% of 100 or 0.23 of 100.

Divide the 3 by 79 and get the result I did

And you indeed get your 0.0379. Divide again by 100 to get 0.0379%

That is the difference.

aren't both number the same?

When you use the percentage sign, it means 1/100th of the number you are using.

0.02 X $100 is $2

0.02% of 100 is 2 cents.

Now I get what the diff you were getting at

My brother, who majored in math at Harvard, probably could have put it clearer terms. After all, he has to explain top secret high tech stuff to the U.S. military, and brick walls grasp his projects faster than live officers do.

But no brainiac

I also say...follow the money.

Keep them far, far away

Thanks for the link

The Daily Wire is an American conservative news and opinion website founded in 2015 by political commentator Ben Shapiro.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ben_Shapiro



Capital Research Center is an American conservative non-profit organization and watchdog group located in Washington

https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Capital_Research_Center


from the OP link




from another story showing it is the same group

The National Legal and Policy Center




here is who the NLPC is:

The National Legal and Policy Center

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Legal_and_Policy_Center

The National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) is a right-leaning 501(c)(3) non-profit group that monitors and reports on the ethics of public officials, supporters of liberal causes, and labor unions in the United States. The Center files complaints with government agencies, legally challenges what they view as abuse and corruption, and publishes reports. The NLPC is described as conservative in nature.The NLPC's current chairman is Peter Flaherty.

The NLPC was founded in 1991 following the release of the Senate Ethics Committee report into the Keating Five.

snip

Lawsuit v. Hillary Healthcare Task Force

NLPC was a plaintiff in the successful 1993 lawsuit to open the meetings and records of Hillary Clinton's health care task force.

On February 24, 1993, Hillary Rodham Clinton and the six Cabinet members serving on the task force were sued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by NLPC, along with two other groups, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and the American Council for Health Care Reform. FACA requires government task forces to conduct its affairs in public if non-government employees, or "outsiders," take part.[5]

On March 10, 1993, Judge Royce Lamberth ruled that the task force had to open its meetings to the plaintiffs and the media.[6] Lamberth ruled that the "official" members of the task force, meaning the First Lady and the Cabinet Secretaries who comprised its membership, could not meet in secret because Clinton was not a government employee. But Lamberth also ruled that all the other people working on the plan, who were organized into "sub-groups," could continue to work in secret, because FACA was never meant to apply to staff.

Lamberth's ruling was appealed by the White House, and was overturned on June 22, 1993 after the task force had supposedly already disbanded on May 30. Justice Department lawyers argued that since Hillary Rodham Clinton "functions in both a legal and practical sense as part of the government," her participation in the task force should not trigger FACA. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed.


snip

Auto Bailout and 2014 General Motors Recall

NLPC was a high-profile critic of the bailout of the auto industry by the United States government. NLPC’s spokesman was Mark Modica, a former Saturn dealer business manager and wiped-out GM bondholder. Following a demand by NLPC, General Motors in 2014 recalled 1.3 million vehicles with a steering loss defect uncovered by Modica.

Senator Robert Menendez

Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) was indicted in April 2015, along with Dr. Salomon Melgen, his largest campaign contributor, partly on the basis of information made public by NLPC through a front-page New York Times story on February 1, 2013. Melgen is a wealthy south Florida eye doctor who was born in the Dominican Republic and is a naturalized U.S. citizen.

The charges related to Menendez’ attempts to derail a Medicare fraud investigation into Melgen’s practice and securing visas for three Melgen “girlfriends.” The indictment also alleged that Menendez pushed a port security deal in the Dominican Republic that would have provided a windfall for Melgen. In return, the indictment alleges Melgen provided Menendez with private jet ride rides, Dominican vacations, and donations to his legal defense fund. Information on the port security deal was provided by NLPC to the Times.

The Justice Department chose not to retry Menendez after his trial ended in a mistrial on November 16, 2017. On August 8, 2018, NLPC filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents pertaining to the prosecution and the decision not to retry Menendez. Then-NLPC Chairman Ken Boehm suggested that Menendez was the beneficiary of political influence by pointing out that Menendez’ lawyer is Abbe Lowell, who also represents Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law. Kushner and his family are longtime donors to Democratic politicians in New Jersey, including Menendez.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

NLPC filed a Complaint with the Federal Election Commission on March 4, 2019 against Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and her chief of staff Saikat Chakrabarti, alleging that they orchestrated an extensive operation to hide hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign spending during the 2018 campaign.

Rep. Maxine Waters

NLPC filed two Complaints, currently pending, against Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) with the Federal Election Commission alleging campaign finance violations in relation to her so-called slate mailer.

The first, filed on July 26, 2018, alleges that Waters violated federal election law by accepting a payment to her campaign fund from the Democratic State Central Committee of California (DSCCC) in the amount of $35,000 for the inclusion of then-Senate candidate, and now Senator Kamala Harris, on Waters’ slate mailer. Whereas candidates like Harris may legally pay Waters’ campaign for the proportional costs of their inclusion on her slate mailer, it is not legal for such payment to be made by a third party like the DSCCC.

The second, filed in October 2018, alleges that Waters violated federal election law by accepting a $25,000 payment to her campaign fund from a group called “Families and Teachers for Antonio.” The payment was to include former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa on the mailer, who was running for Governor. Whereas candidates like Villaraigosa may legally pay Waters’ campaign for the proportional costs of their inclusion on her slate mailer, it is not legal for such payment to be made by a third party.[26][27][28]

Rep. Elijah Cummings

On May 20, 2019, NLPC filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service against the Center for Global Policy Solutions (CGPS), a nonprofit headed by Maya Rockeymoore Cummings, wife of Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD). Mrs. Cummings is also the principal in Global Policy Solutions, LLC, a for-profit Limited Liability Corporation that the Complaint charges is “impermissibly entwined” with the nonprofit.

Constitutional Challenge to Mueller Authority

NLPC is providing financial and logistical support to a constitutional challenge to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment and authority by Andrew Miller, a former aide to indicted GOP operative Roger Stone, who has been subpoenaed in the case. Miller is represented by constitutional and appellate attorney Paul Kamenar, who is working on a partial pro bono basis.

NLPC Chairman Peter Flaherty told the New York Times on June 28, 2018, “The founders feared exactly what we see in Mueller: a runaway federal official. We hope to see Mueller’s operation disbanded, once and for all.”


snip


here is more RW pushing of this claptrap


AOC’s chief of staff ran $1M slush fund by diverting campaign cash to his own companies

by Alana Goodman
| March 04, 2019 03:34 PM <<<< BEFORE WaPo and a RW rag

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/ocasio-cortezs-chief-of-staff-ran-1m-slush-fund-by-diverting-campaign-cash-to-his-own-companies


also before (I can go on and on)

WND
COMPLAINT: OCASIO-CORTEZ'S CHIEF OF STAFF RAN $1M SLUSH FUND
FEC alerted to alleged diversion of campaign cash to his companies
Published: 03/04/2019 at 6:27 PM <<<< BEFORE WaPo and a RW site

https://www.wnd.com/2019/03/complaint-ocasio-cortezs-chief-of-staff-ran-1m-slush-fund/



and going deeper (and this is what kicked off the RW firm to file a complaint in the first place)


PAC aligned with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez paid boyfriend $6G for marketing work
Published February 21
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pac-aligned-with-ocasio-cortez-paid-6g-her-boyfriend-for-marketing-work


these RW POS sources and sites keep running with all this bullshit even though most all of it is debunked


here is a debunking BEFORE Fox New ran with that last one


No, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Didn't Hire Her Boyfriend Riley Roberts As A Staffer

ANDREA GONZÁLEZ-RAMÍREZ
LAST UPDATED FEBRUARY 15, 2019, 8:00 PM

https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/02/224559/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-boyfriend-riley-roberts-congress-staff-email

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez found herself at the center of another right-wing Twitter conspiracy Friday morning, after a Republican strategist falsely claimed that she had employed her longtime partner Riley Roberts as a paid congressional staffer. The New York congresswoman and her team corrected the record, saying this is not true.

Conservative podcast host Luke Thompson first made the claims. Taking a screenshot from an unknown source, he tweeted: "While you were having a nice Valentine's Day, @AOC decided to put her boyfriend on staff - drawing a salary on the taxpayer's dime. Nice to see her adapting to the swamp so quickly." (The tweet was temporarily taken down because the screenshot, which includes Roberts' email and phone number, was said to be in violation of Twitter's terms of service.)


Ocasio-Cortez was quick to debunk the claim, clarifying that Roberts obtained an official House email address in order to get access to her calendar. "Actually this cal designation is a permission so he can have access to my Google Cal. Congressional spouses get Gcal access all the time. Next time check your facts before you tweet nonsense," she tweeted.

Link to tweet

snip


more showing that it was RW-started and pushed

A conservative group alleges Ocasio-Cortez and her allies ran a PAC scam. But there's no evidence of wrongdoing.
While the structure of her campaign and its vendors might be confusing, it's not illegal, campaign finance experts said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fact-check-did-ocasio-cortez-her-team-break-campaign-finance-n980121

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's congressional campaign has come under scrutiny in recent days for what a conservative group has alleged is a massive violation of campaign finance law. The National Legal and Policy Center filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission on Tuesday, alleging that the New York Democrat and her allies used a corporation to skirt campaign finance reporting laws. The complaint comes after a number of conservative-leaning outlets said Ocasio-Cortez broke campaign finance laws when she hired her boyfriend for marketing work.

David Mitrani, an attorney representing Ocasio-Cortez's campaign and the related organizations named in the FEC complaint, pushed back strongly on the reports in a statement Wednesday, saying that the entities "have at all times been conducted fully in compliance with federal campaign finance laws." Ocasio-Cortez herself denied the allegation on Tuesday to Fox News: "There is no violation."

Campaign finance experts, meanwhile, told NBC News that while the structure of her campaign and its vendors might be confusing, there's no evidence of some kind of million-dollar scam as has been alleged in news reports.

snip


Conservative Ethics Group Files Campaign Spending Complaint Against Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Her Chief of Staff
Lawyers for Ocasio-Cortez say she and other Democrat activists "fully complied with the law and the highest ethical standards."

https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/03/07/aoc-chief-of-staff/

snip

The complaint states that the Policy Center “has found reason to believe [the] Respondents knowingly and willfully violated 2 U.S.C. 434(b)(5)(A),” a provision of U.S. campaign finance law that requires the treasurer of any registered political committee to report the name and address of anyone who receives more than $200 in campaign-related spending from that committee, along with the dates and purpose of that spending.

In a lengthy and detailed statement sent to Snopes, attorneys for Ocasio-Cortez and the PACs accused in the complaint said all their activities had “fully complied with the law and the highest ethical standards.”

snip


Crucially, the attorneys emphasized that the way the committees described the services provided by the company was, in brief, no less specific than the law required it to be: “Brand New Congress LLC received guidance from the Federal Election Commission as to how payments from the PACs and the various candidates to Brand New Congress LLC would need to be reported. Consistent with FEC regulations, precedent and practice, the FEC’s Reports and Analysis Division confirmed that payments by the PACs and candidates to this vendor, Brand New Congress LLC, did not need to be broken out by subcategories of service, nor would subvendors need to be itemized.”

The FEC’s website itself stipulates that “strategy consulting” is an adequately specific description of services rendered in return for PAC spending. Whether the activities of the PACs or the company violated campaign finance law, or whether the complaint has any merit, will be matters for the FEC to decide. A spokesperson confirmed to Snopes that the FEC had received the complaint but said they were legally prevented from offering any further comment.

snip



this whole 'anonymous blogger' story in the OP is RW-started and RW-spread tosh

Since when aren't facts, facts?

And here's a question I have...when is she going to use her congressional allowance? The over 1 mil she is allotted to set up a district office of her own, rather than a desk in someone else's and staff it with a person/s who will actually answer the phone.?

Repeating that doesn't change the truth.

but repeating doesn't make it so

About the author of that blog, Grace Laine:

Former journalist & university professor. Far Left Liberal. Political activist for women's rights, civil rights, LGBT rights and rights of the differently-abled. Grace Laine is my online pseudonym.

OpenSecrets, Ballotpedia, and Wikipedia are hardly RW. Characterizing them as such is insulting.

I suggest you edit your post or delete it altogether.

this isn't the first time that this 'pages long' approach has been used to try and put an end to a conversation or stop info from being shared.

anonymous blog. The blog writer can claim they are anything, as they are anonymous.

The blog articles' RW sources are listed right there, and the whole meme is a RW talking point.

I NEVER said OpenSecrets, Ballotpedia, and Wikipedia were RW, that is patently untrue and a weak attempt to try and conflate.


The Daily Wire, Capital Research Center, The National Legal and Policy Center on the other hand, ARE most definitely RW and are definitely the sources (The Daily Wire, and The Capital Research Center) and the initiators (in The National Legal and Policy Center's case) of a RW started, RW-driven talking points, fake news, and memes.

What kind of

blogger uses alt-right scum Ben Shapiro and RW legal hatchet jobbers NLPC as primary sources??????


I will not alter or delete the truth, sorry.

that all were RW. Patently ridiculous.

Too many people here have seen their work. And they don’t need GOP propaganda to know what they know. All the cutting and pasting in the world ain’t gonna change that.

+1

https://goblindly.blog/2019/07/21/the-justice-dems-donors-and-dollars-part-two/

Saikat Chakrabarti in his uniform:

....where several thousand Americans died.

The chief of staff of a Member of Congress of the United States wears a t-shirt honoring him.

and the story is a disgraceful one, shame on him.

...after the group that perpetrated the Armenian genocide, "The Young Turks".

would AOC find an appreciative audience for her COS?

Edited to add...I read he recruited her, so maybe he's actually the boss. Can't say but do wonder.

....at 714 South Gay Street in Knoxville, Tennessee.

Here is her "Statement of Candidacy" filed with the FEC:

https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/H8NY15148/1161740/

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
714 South Gay Street
Knoxville, TN 37902

I'm assuming that she put their Knoxville address on the form as a convenience and that at the time she was an actual resident of her district.

...to which the PAC pays a lot of money.

From the article below:

For the record before someone makes the accusation, the Associated Press is NOT a "right wing source".

https://www.apnews.com/287aa3a9433b120130ecb16b7ff2941b

to receive the cash